> Has "safety" become a buzzword? What we really strive for is correctness. Correctness is about program making what I meant as a programmer. Safety is a diffe

> Has "safety" become a buzzword? What we really strive for is correctness. Correctness is about program making what I meant as a programmer. Safety is a different thing. I see it as insulator on wires. It helps me to avoid shocks while working with electricity. Safety guarantees of Rust is like that, I have a pointer, I could use that pointer without fear of segmentation fault or data race. It feels like safety. It named "safety". So I believe it is a good coherent name. > if you need absolute correctness (when human life depends on the software) you would probably use Ada and Spark or something else that enables you to actually prove correctness. Maybe. But between absolute buggy code and absolute correct code there is a spectrum of not so buggy and not so correct code. We need a compromise enabling us to create a reasonable reliable software with a reasonable effort.